Edited for this forum
PLAY:
Bases loaded, batter hits line drive down 3rd base line. PU motions foul, (I assume prematurely) because he lets play develop, 2 runs score. PU then confers with his partner, I assume that they agree it was a fair ball because they were going to let the play stand until the defensive coach made a stink about the PU signaling foul. PU then calls batter off 2nd, returns runners to bases, and batter continues his at bat. The questions are:
MY ANSWER:
"Once it's called foul, it's foul": That is is one of the great myths of baseball. Even when the interpretations are published, some umpires simply refuse to accept them.
(Note for Little League umpires; Little League interpretations officially endorse this myth. Foul is Foul See the reference related by Dave Hensley)
The basis for this claim is published in Section 449 from my book, "Baseball Rule Differences" and reprinted below. It explains the correct call, regardless of which set of rules the game was using.
You asked five questions.
ANSWER: No, it's up to the players. The three national rules interpreters, Brad Rumble (FED), Bill Thurston (NCAA), and Mike Fitzpatrick (PBUC) all agreed that a call of "foul" does not necessarily kill the play at once.
ANSWER: For a fair ball, motion is all the umpire does give. He points to fair territory, vigorously and several times if the decision was close. Ordinarily, umpires don't signal "foul" until they have thrown up their arms and signaled a touchdown. That signal is generally coupled with "Foul ball." The degree of closeness determines how loud the umpire goes. Here, it appears the umpire merely became confused; he pointed "foul," but since he said nothing, I assume he meant to point "fair."
He pointed wrong, but he let the play finish. The players did not react to his call. He should have stood his ground, for the result of the play does not give either team an advantage not intended by the rules.
Here's an important point for you and the umpires readers who happen along: When possible, the result of an umpire's call should reflect what actually happened on the field. If the umpire had not knuckled under, that axiom would have prevailed for that play on that field for that day.
The UIC's comments to the defensive coach should have been something like: "Coach, I pointed in the wrong direction, but you and I both know it was a fair ball. All the players knew it was a fair ball. And that's what we're going with."
ANSWER: No, but I've was on the field when an umpire properly reversed his call -- twice. It was the same play both times, different umpire. The batter hunkers away from a high inside pitch, the ball whacks the bat, and the UIC erroneously calls: "Foul ball!" The ball each time rolled briskly to the pitcher, who picked it up and threw out the batter-runner. In Game 1 the batter stopped in his tracks; in Game 2, he raced for first.
Both games were played under FED rules.
Both umpires knew what to do; we had covered it many times in our association meetings. Both umpires declared the B-R out. The coaches in both games came out to "discuss" the situation. My partner each time explained the rule, and each time the coaches left without undue argument.
Of course, I wandered down to listen to the discussion and to add support if needed. Since I was the rules interpreter for our association (known as such to the coaches since each year I gave a clinic for them), they naturally assumed I would have said something if I did not wholeheartedly agree with my partner's decision. After all, when a rule is misinterpreted, that is one of the five times when a call can be legally changed.
BTW: If Game 2 had been played under NCAA or OBR rules, the outcome would have been the same as in the FED ruling. But since the B-R did not run in Game 1, the UIC could not legally have reversed his call at those levels. He would have had to listen -- rightly -- to the defensive coach complain about poor mechanics.
ANSWER: Not at all. The rule myth is that "foul" cannot be changed. It's not true, and your question allowed me to clarify that.
[Note: "SE" is Scott Ehret, who was editor of my book and baseball editor for "Referee" magazine. ]
449 UMPIRE: CALL CHANGED: FOUL TO FAIR
FED: Point not covered by the rules. OFF INTERP 175-449: Rumble ruled that an umpire may change a call of foul to fair: If players react to the "foul" call, the umpire is to decide what the outcome of the play would have been if he had ruled correctly on his first decision. (News, #28, 4/90)
NCAA: Point not covered by the rules. OFF INTERP 176-449: Thurston ruled that the umpire may reverse a call of foul to fair if he does so immediately and if no player reacted to the original call. (phone call to SE, 11/19/90) ALSO: OFF INTERP 177-449: Thurston ruled that such a call may also be changed if the call had no impact on the "obvious" outcome of a safe hit. (phone call to SE, 11/19/90)
Play 148-449: NCAA only. B1 yanks a line drive down the left-field line that bounces just fair. The umpire, confused, calls, "Foul." B1 stops momentarily to object, then proceeds to first as F7 recovers the ball in deep left field. Next, the offensive coach contends the ball was, in fact, fair. Ruling: If the umpire agrees with the coach that the ball was fair, he may change his call because the "obvious" outcome of the hit would have been a "double." B1 is awarded second. If the umpire does not (or will not) agree, the ball remains foul and B1 returns to bat.
OBR: Point not covered by the rules. OFF INTERP 178-449: Fitzpatrick ruled the umpire may reverse his call if everyone concerned ignored his initial signal. (phone call to SE, 11/19/90)
Play 149-449: With two runners on, B1's line drive skips off third, bounds to the wooden fence and rattles around in foul territory with the third baseman and left fielder giving chase. The umpire calls "Foul" and then immediately reverses himself. In spite of the first call, the runners and fielders keep moving. Ruling: Play continues without reference to the erroneous call.
Play 150-449: Without dropping his bat Bubba hunkers down to avoid an inside pitch; the ball nicks off the knob end and rolls into fair territory. The UIC erroneously calls "Foul ball!" and then quickly yells "Play it! Fair ball!" On the first call Bubba stops and starts to return; on the second call, F2 picks up the ball and throws to first for the out. Ruling: In FED, the umpire will rule out or safe, based on his judgment of what would have happened if he had not called foul. (Bubba is probably out.) In NCAA and OBR, because the umpire rushed to judgment (and players reacted), Bubba remains at bat, charged with a strike.
Note 374: You must understand, though, that reversing a call from "fair" to "foul" causes no rules problem. You'll face an argument, but the changed call will not affect the outcome of the play. That is true whether or not fielders or runners react to an initial "point" toward fair territory. If the ball is subsequently ruled foul, simply order the batter back to the box &emdash; and any runners back to bases occupied at the time of the pitch. (Of course, you might also need to order the coach back into the third-base coaching box.)
Posted to the eteamz umpire discussion board by Dave Hensley
Thanks for that thorough, detailed post, Carl. I have one more "national" rule interpretation to throw into the mix, and unfortunately it goes the other way. For those umpires calling games among the 3,000,000 Little Leaguers® in the world, they are governed by this comment from "The Right Call," Little League's official casebook:
Little League Casebook Comment: Remember when you call "foul, " you live with that call. You cannot change a foul call after it is made.
Wouldn't be the first time Little League has gone it's own separate way, for no good reason.
The Right Call is written (at times) in a very casual (I would argue overly-casual, for the official publication of rulings that it is supposed to be) and folksy manner. There's some reference somewhere that describes the proper ruling on a call that is typically very unpopular with the fans, and the comment itself says something like "make this call from your cellphone as you're leaving the field."
Nevertheless, my guess is the inclusion of the statement above concerning foul balls would be enough to cause Williamsport to thump an umpire who followed the OBR/FED/NCAA interpretations and fixed an erroneous foul ball call, if it got to them in a tournament protest situation.